Chip-level threats are a potential problem now that Apple has switched to Intel chips
Intel Macs vulnerable to 'chip-level' threats
/v3-uk/news/1942647/intel-macs-vulnerable-chip-level-threats
22 May 2006, Tom Sanders in California , V3
Researchers have claimed that "chip-level threats" pose a potential problem for Intel-powered Mac systems.
A chip-level attack targets a feature or vulnerability in the processor rather than attacking software as is the case with nearly all today's security threats.
Examples of chip-level attacks are rare. The last known serious outbreak dates back to 1998, when the CIH/Chernobyl virus embedded itself into the flash-BIOS of infected systems.
Security vendor McAfee said in a recent white paper about security challenges for Apple systems that chip-level threats are a potential problem now that Apple has switched to Intel chips. But the firm admitted that there are no examples of such attacks.
The cautionary white paper was published on the same day that McAfee launched a version of its security software for Intel-based systems.
Critics could use this fact to point out that the security firm was trying to spread fear, uncertainty and doubt about Mac security in an effort to advertise its software. McAfee did not return several requests for comment.
The threat of chip-level attacks is theoretical at this stage, according to security researchers.
Bruce Huges, a senior antivirus researcher at Trend Micro, believes that chip-level attacks are too hard to craft.
"[Attackers] going after the chip is not something that we see as a great threat right now," he told vnunet.com.
"Whenever you go the Bios or chipset level, it is very easy to ruin things so that the computer will not boot.
"[Attackers] want to use your computer to steal credit card information and install spyware or adware. The last thing that they want to do is destroy your computer."
Despite the fact that Apple computers and traditional PCs run on Intel chips the features of those chips tend to change frequently, so there is no guarantee that an attack that works on one Intel Mac will succeed in targeting another.
An attacker looking successfully to infect as many systems as possible needs a most common denominator or critical mass.
"We may see that critical mass some day, but I cannot see that happening," Shane Coursen, senior technical consultant at Kaspersky Labs, told vnunet.com.
Chip-level attacks are more likely for industrial espionage or data theft. " The bigger danger is where malware writers know that a company has standardised on one specific chipset," said Coursen.
"With that knowledge, an attacker could successfully target that place of
business."
But Coursen and Huges argued that the public should be made aware of the
potential threat of chip-level attacks, even if there is only a small chance
that such an attack could take place.
"There is always a fine line between fear-mongering and being realistic about what's out there. Everything I say can be a double-edged sword," said Coursen. "It might just help if the threat materialises."
© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2010, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093
Do you agree?
Commercially orientated press release.
Apple FUD appears to be increasing.
Posted by Peter Morgan, 25 May 2006
Pathetic
McAfee and other "security" companies that spread FUD should be ashamed of themselves. Clearly, their publications do not deserve being called white papers.
Posted by V-Train, 22 May 2006
more research needed
Please, check to see if the Mac-Intels actualy use a BIOS chip, and also, if they don't then what do they use and how suseptible are they to being compormised? You might find that no one really knows if the new Intel based Macs are vulnerable.
Posted by Tem, 22 May 2006
No Bios
INTEL based don't use BIOS.
Posted by The General, 22 May 2006
Monkeys are also a threat
Please secure your Macs against the threat of stark raving mad monkeys. BTW, I sell monkey protectors at my web site
While this situation (with monkeys and potential chip threats) is serious, the threat also existed with PPC Macs. There are no know examples of monkey threats or PPC chip attacks, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.
Be careful, it's a jungle out there!
Posted by Brian Pickerill, 22 May 2006
FUD ALERT!
Did someone forget that the Mac does not use the highly insecure and ancient BIOS? There are a few more controls in EFI to prevent this.
And if you do plant code in EFI, you would have to compromise the Mach bootloader, which does not use EFI when it starts to run.
Oh... and to do this you have to run as root. On MacOS, this means asking for a password which should raise suspicions--as opposed to Windows where you have to run as an administrative user to get anything done.
I think we say that this story from these alleged experts attempts to spread Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD). After all, using FUD they continue to sell you stuff you do not need!
Posted by Scott Barman, 22 May 2006
Watch out for slobbering babies, too
The new Macs are also vulnerable to damage from slobbering babies. While this is probably no different from earlier Macs, the real important thing to remember here (the take home message, if you will) is that they are JUST as vulnerable as PCs.
So, PCs are the SAME as Macs. You might as well get a PC, because if there are any slobbering babies slobbering into your equipment, then what good is all that great Apple software? It's just as vulnerable to baby slobber as a generic PC.
Posted by Brian, 22 May 2006
Here is all you need to know....
"But the firm admitted that there are no examples of such attacks. "
Well, then it's not a problem to worry about.
Let's focus on the unpatched unix expoits that 'may' exist in OS X/Linux, and more importantly the gazillions holes in windows. Then let's talk about the hypothetical.
Posted by jd, 22 May 2006
Bad journalism
The very title of this article asserts that macs are vulnerable. how many will see the title, not care about the technical details, and repeat this crap?
The reporter should retract the assertion and put up a new title. "Billion to one chance your mac will some day in the future have a virus other than the usual suspects."
Ralph FInley
Posted by Ralph Finley, 22 May 2006
Yes, it is a proper white paper
The kind that is soft, perforated and sold on a roll.
Posted by LinuxGuy, 22 May 2006
Blah Blah Blah
Intel Mac doesn't use a BIOS.
Posted by Willie, 23 May 2006
FUD Article Headline
Seems to me writer of this column is using FUD to attract readers to a story that is hypothetical
Posted by Jones, 23 May 2006
huh?
So Macs are vulnerable to a form of malware whose last major outbreak was eight years ago? Sounds like a relative non-issue, doesn't it?
Posted by Nick, 23 May 2006
Chip level threats
If these are chip level then the threat to Macs is incidental. Other manufacturers also use these chips yet there's no mention of their machines being vulnerable. Talk about one-sided reporting.
Posted by Tim Pinder, 26 May 2006